172.6 VVRGLPJA

CH-VS

Art. 29 Legge sulla procedura e sulla giurisdizione amministrativa (LPJA) - Motivazione e Apertura

**Il Procedimento davanti alle Autorità Amministrative - Il Provvedimento**

Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (114 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 29 VVRG - Motivazione e Apertura · Motivazione e Apertura

1. L'autorità comunica la decisione alle parti per iscritto. La decisione deve essere indicata come tale, anche se viene notificata in forma di lettera.

2. Se la natura del caso lo richiede, la decisione può essere comunicata oralmente. Deve essere confermata per iscritto qualora l'interessato, informato del suo diritto durante la comunicazione orale, lo richieda entro cinque giorni.

3. La decisione scritta deve essere motivata nei fatti e nel diritto. Deve essere datata e firmata. Deve includere un avviso sul rimedio legale ordinario ammissibile, comprendente il termine per proporlo.

4. Il termine per il ricorso decorre dalla comunicazione o conferma scritta.

← Art. 28a VVRG Legge sulla procedura e sulla giurisdizione amministrativa (LPJA) - Principio Art. 30 VVRG - Pubblicazione Ufficiale →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (12)

A3 24 20 · vs (art. 29 al. 3 LPJA)

Construction Company Fined for Unauthorised and Non-Compliant Retaining Walls

Cited in consideration 3.1 as part of the framework for the right to be heard, but not in the dispositive orders.

A1 24 96 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Property Owners' Association Appeal Regarding Road Resurfacing as Material Expropriation

Cited in the reasoning section regarding the duty to motivate decisions, relevant for the procedural validity of the lower decision which was ultimately upheld (dismissal).

A1 24 27 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Cantonal Council Water Protection Zone Width Dispute

Cited in the reasoning (E. 3.2) as the cantonal legal basis for the duty to substantiate decisions.

A1 23 134 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Appeal Against Building Permit Revocation Dismissed

Cited to address the argument concerning the duty to provide a reasoned decision, though ultimately finding the requirement met.

A1 22 162 · vs (Art. 29 al. 3 LPJA)

Appeal Regarding Denial of Social Assistance and Emergency Aid

Procedural article cited in the context of the formal complaint about the motivation, which the court implicitly rejected by partially upholding the decision.

A1 22 94 · vs (art. 29 al. 3 LPJA)

Group Residence Operating Ban Upheld Due to Severe Fire Safety Deficiencies

Cited when examining the appellant's complaint regarding the violation of the right to be heard (reasoned decision).

A1 22 104 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Cantonal Council Decision Overturned for Failure to Address Key Objections in Structural Improvement Project

Cited as the cantonal basis for the obligation to state reasons for official acts, the violation of which led to the annulment.

A3 20 36 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Challenge to Administrative Order Regarding Water Intake Structure Fine and Removal

Cited in the reasoning (E. 1.2) regarding the requirement for a legal advice notice in the written decision.

RVJ 2021 p 55 59 · vs (Art. 29 al. 3 LPJA)

Law Graduate Successfully Challenges Notary Exam Failure Due to Insufficient Justification of Low Score

Cited as the procedural law context for the requirement to motivate decisions, linked to the right to be heard.

A1 19 156 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Environmental Groups v. Canton on Wolf Cull Permit Validity

Mentioned in the reasoning concerning the duty to provide reasons, which supported the main ground for annulment (although not directly cited in the dispositive orders, it is cited alongside Art. 29 para. 2 BV in the context of assessing the validity of the prior decision's reasoning).

A1 19 44 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 VVRG)

Administrative Appeal on Expropriation Compensation and Valuation Transparency

Cited in the reasoning to establish the minimum requirement for justifying a sovereign act (ruling) as part of the right to be heard.

A1 09 26 · vs (Art. 29 al. 3 LPJA)

Cantonal Commission Authority vs. Procedural Rights in Unauthorized Earthworks Case

Cited in the reasoning regarding the fulfillment of motivation requirements, although the primary substantive ground for the verdict is procedural regarding the right to file a new application.